IMPORTANT POINT
A civil dispute can have criminal implications; however, specific allegations of forgery constitute a cognizable offence that warrants investigation despite the existence of civil proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J.

1. Pursuant to the order of this Court, learned AGA has produced the copy of the instructions which is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri V.M. Zaidi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri M.J. Akhtar and Sri Shahzad Alam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Satyam Narayan, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Ratan Singh, learned AGA for the State.

3. The present writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned first information report dated 15.05.2024 and the investigation of Case Crime No.152 of 2024, under Sections-420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station-Civil Lines, District-Meerut.

4. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned FIR is illegal as no preliminary investigation was conducted by the police before lodging the same as directed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Others reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri) 524 regarding cases being civil in nature. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegation in the impugned FIR is that a forged family settlement dated 02.11.2007 was prepared but same was not executed by the petitioner and one of the uncle of the petitioner, Sayed Muste Hasan Zaidi alias Nanhey Miyan had purchased stamp paper and prepared the family settlement dated 02.11.2007 with the consent of all his brother and their heirs in the year 2007 itself. After the death of the father of the petitioner, petitioner came to know about the settlement dated 02.11.2007 from his uncle and when respondent no.4 and his other family members did not agree for partition of the property then the petitioner filed a Civil Suit bearing No.769 of 2003 in the court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)-II, Meerut for declaration and injunction on 12.07.2023 claiming his ownership and title in the family property in dispute. On the basis of family settlement dated 02.11.2007 obtained by the petitioner from his uncle Sayed Muste Hasan Zaidi (real brother of respondent no.4) which is still pending and validity of the family settlement dated 02.11.2007 is yet to be adjudicated by the civil court. But the respondent no.4 after the knowledge of the aforesaid suit instead of contesting the same before the civil court had lodged an impugned FIR on the basis of false and concocted story. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that regarding the genuineness of the signature of the respondent no.4 and his brothers, report of hand writing expert was also filed by the petitioner before the civil court and family settlement dated 02.11.2007 was also verified by the Advocate Notary and also issued his certificate dated 25.04.2024. It was further submitted that though in FIR there is allegation that stamp used to prepare forge family settlement dated 02.11.2007 was purchased on 06.12.2007 but information given to petitioner by treasury office shows that stamp in question was purchased on 29.10.2007 not on 06.12.2007. Therefore, this allegation is absolutely false. In support of this submission learned Senior Counsel also produced copy of R.T.I. information given by the concerned treasury office.

5. It is lastly contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that dispute regarding the family settlement dated 02.11.2007 has been pending before the civil court but by the impugned FIR, the petitioner has given the colour of criminality to the civil dispute between the parties. Therefore, no offence u/s 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC is made out and impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.

6. Per contra, Sri Satyam Narayan, learned counsel for opposite party no.4 as well as Sri Ratan Singh, learned AGA have vehemently opposed the present petition and submitted that from the perusal of the FIR, it is clear that there is specific allegation of committing forgery by preparing forged family settlement dated 02.11.2007 in which the signatures of the respondent no.4